Advertisement
Promo

Desktop platforms Toolkit

Stallman: Protect the freedom of free software

Stephen Withers ZDNet Australia

Published: 11 Oct 2004 14:45 BST

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

The terms 'free software' and 'open source' are often used interchangeably, but those attending Richard Stallman's presentation at the Australian Computer Society Victorian branch forum last week were left in no doubt about his view of the philosophical difference.

The benefits of open source are presented in terms of practical values such as reliable software, he said, but the free software movement prefers freedom to utility. This, he explained, is because free software can always be improved, but you can't regain the freedom you lose by using non-free software.

The two camps therefore have a very different view of proprietary software. It's becoming increasingly common for companies to run proprietary software such as the Oracle database on GNU/Linux (Stallman takes exception when people refer to the operating system as Linux for reasons we'll explain later), but that's not acceptable to a free software advocate. To explain why, we must first examine Stallman's definition of free software (derived from the GNU.org site), which involves four freedoms for the user:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1).

The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbour (freedom 2).

The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3).

Without these freedoms, using software presents people with ethical dilemmas. If a neighbour sees you running a program, realises it would be useful and asks for a copy, what do you do? If the program isn't free, you have to choose between two evils: either be a bad neighbour by not helping, or violate the software licence. The latter is the lesser evil, he argued, because the organisation supplying the software has already done something bad to you by supplying proprietary software, but you would still be going back on your promise. Furthermore, you are spreading more copies of non-free software that will present a similar dilemma to the recipients. The answer, said Stallman, is to only use free software.

A spirit of goodwill is a society's most important asset, he argued, as it makes the difference between a humane society and a dog-eat-dog jungle. Some organisations are "poisoning" this resource, he said: "they are the terrorists, and we have to bring their terror campaign to an end".

Next

Previous

1 2


  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendlyPrint with EPSON

Did you find this article useful?
136 out of 258 people found this useful


Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:





Video icon

Video

Microsoft Windows 7 Special Report Special Report

How Microsoft can make Windows 7 a success

How Microsoft can make Windows 7 a success

Comment Many businesses have given Vista a wide berth; Microsoft must focus on five areas to make sure Windows 7 doesn't suffer the same fate, argues TechRepublic's Jason Hiner

More Special Reports

Desktop Management Benchmarking

Test Your Desktop Management Systems

How good are your company's desktop management solutions? How do they compare with those of your peers?

Take two minutes to complete our new Desktop Management and Energy Consumption benchmark, and find out what issues your business needs to focus on.


Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters